1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates generally to a method and system for managing, unifying, and developing organizational innovation, and more specifically relates to linking diverse methods and systems, supported by data processing, to manage and organize innovation and processes directed toward facilitating innovation in any field or industry.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Innovation management is often confused with project management which is primarily devoted to operations and work-flow rather than the creation of new knowledge. Prior innovation art in the past before 1999 and to the present has consisted of a diverse and disconnected patchwork of theories and approaches regarding creativity and idea generation predominantly “the use of brainstorming” (an informal group idea method introduced around 1950).
The pursuit of innovation as a deliberate and attainable objective has grown more intense with time. No longer can a major corporation simply wait around for an inspirational moment or hope that new products, services and ideas will magically appear in a suggestion box. Competition has forced some successful companies to actively seek methods to search for new ideas for products and services. Several ad-hoc organizational approaches and styles of innovation development have emerged, but many still have not gone beyond initial brainstorming and idea management.
These efforts also include seeking innovation support from outside sources such as consultants, academia, acquisition, creativity courses, as well as contests and team driven programs. Some of these approaches have met with mixed success, depending on the quality of the providers, but these approaches have not established an exportable internal innovation competence.
Another approach to fostering innovation is where a company establishes a department of innovation, or an equivalent, to be the central point of innovation efforts. Well-intentioned managers in finance or technology are typically put in charge of such projects, but many of these managers have been totally without experience or training in using innovation methods, and some of these managers have been hostile to creativity.
While sometimes useful, these innovation approaches are inconsistent and still leave much to be desired, because many of these approaches require much trial and error, often leading to dead ends or aborted programs. Few of these approaches are codified or can be repeated or otherwise used by another department or organization.
While innovation development is acknowledged as an important technological and economic goal, innovation in a typical company at this time lacks established professional methods and systems, and has progressed far too slowly. Some published documents are listed below as examples.
It should be noted that most of the published documents below were filed long after the U.S. provisional application filing date for the present invention in August of 1999, and after the U.S. utility patent application filing in August of 2000. Furthermore, the documents below do not disclose comprehensive innovation development and management.
U.S. Utility Pat. No. 5,109,337, issued Apr. 28, 1992, to Ferriter, et al., entitled “Conceptual Design Tool,” discloses a product design tool to flesh out a hardware design and manufacturing spec. Ferriter, et al. do not disclose a solution to general innovation problems, but disclose a methodology for iterating through a hardware design process and tracking important documentation and manufacturing information, using a computer-based project management system.
U.S. Utility Pat. No. 5,355,317, issued Oct. 11, 1994, to Talbott, et al., entitled “Method and Apparatus for System Design,” discloses a software tool focused on product development and definition of the evolving product, with a database that ties together different types of documents for defining the product as its definition evolves. The disclosure concerns product definition and design using a document management or project management system that collects information, but is not driving innovation through access to problem solving techniques.
U.S. Provisional Appl. Ser. No. US2003/093478, published May 15, 2003, by Hughes, entitled “Collaboration and Innovation System,” discloses a collaboration and idea management tool, which facilitates innovation efforts being done in response to stated problems and/or identified opportunities.
U.S. Provisional Appl. Ser. No. US2003/0187706, published Oct. 2, 2003, by Buchmiller, et al., entitled “Innovation Engine Portal Method and System,” discloses a classic knowledge management system to create an idea management system, with connections to “resources” and access to internal corporate subject matter experts). However, it does not disclose as a resource innovation techniques performed by people.
U.S. Provisional Appl. Ser. No. US2004/0054567, published Mar. 18, 2004, by Bubner, entitled “Analysis of Business Innovation Potential,” discloses employment of an innovation audit survey as a tool for making investments. It also discloses that innovation audits have been a standard tool for innovation practitioners since the 1980s. Bubner discloses that innovation management is in its infancy due to lack of theory and models. Bubner also discloses a model that is idea driven, rather than opportunity driven.
U.S. Provisional Appl. Ser. No. US2004/107131, published Jun. 3, 2004, by Wilkerson, et al., entitled “Value Innovation Management System and Method,” discloses a system for evaluating customer/consumer data to select a direction for product development that will provide value to the customer. It does not disclose managing the creative aspects of problem solving, nor giving users guidance.
Canadian Pat. No. CA2490613, issued Jun. 29, 2005, to Mark Ortiz, et al., entitled “Graphical Representation, Storage and Dissemination of Display Thinking,” discloses a technique for facilitated problem solving and collaboration. It discloses note cards and storyboarding as tools used in many other problem solving techniques. The ability to capture sessions for later reference or revision is disclosed, but this is not an innovation system.
U.S. Provisional Appl. Ser. No. US2004/044135, published Feb. 24, 2005, by Klausnitzer Norbert, entitled “Method for Managing and Providing an Idea Management System,” discloses an idea management system that includes an aspect of CRM (Customer Relationship Management) if it is setup to accept ideas from customers. The disclosure does not address other sources for ideas, problem solving or organizational setup for innovation.
U.S. Provisional Appl. Ser. No. US2005/171910, published Aug. 4, 2005, by Wu Chuan-Yu, et al., entitled “Collaborative Operations in Product Lifecycle Management and System Thereof,” discloses an information document management system (electronic document management system) for the product life cycle that can connect manufacturers with providers and customers. However, the disclosure does not address from where innovation may come.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,944,514, issued Sep. 13, 2005, to Matheson, entitled “Innovation Information Management Model,” discloses an idea management system, not a complete innovation system. It defines innovation as product development, not as a generic ability to solve problems. It does not address where the ideas come from; it discloses a tool to document the design results. It also discloses linking disparate document types, but this is also done today by most document management systems. It does not disclose tools to move an innovation process, but instead discloses a tool to record and retrieve records of activities.
What is needed is a comprehensive method and system to assist an innovation process.